About your Search

20120925
20121003
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9
enforcement one of the reasons why the obama administration embraced it, but it's all about how these things are represented and what they're obligated to say when your pants down. do you believe in enforcing these laws been problematic are not? and when you say -- the whole idea of the. >> translator: is that these aren't the good kids. many -- i think they're right. it doesn't mean that they're a bad kid. community college or maybe you have got in trouble when you're a teenager. i think there is something very disingenuous about the debate we have around us, but of course that is because advocates of destruction debate in the certain white. this is rooted in any kind of believes that our prior to the way that we actually structure the conversation. i think that advocates have structured the conversation very advantageous sleep. >> a couple more questions in the month to cut off. i was wondering if you could and testimonials in terms of looking forward toward the democratic party strength. >> and also the gentleman over there. >> thank you. thanks to the forum today. the panelists. i can gi
of the administration usually reflects the guy at the top. so you have obama as someone who comes across on the people who know him as sort of moody, indecisive, sent this come as someone who has been jokes in his presence when he's not the one telling them, someone who is not a constant predictable northstar. and that comes through in the culture of the administration. a lot of the people are willing to talk because at some point it will spend weeks or months working on a decision, a policy just to topple at the last minute. one of the close collection's advisers very little reefing her back out of the issue. we just sort of sweep and ended in a careful where a negotiation and planning. so it wasn't an ideological motivation. it was a personal motivation, professional motivation. >> that is certainly true. let's go through some of the case studies you talk about your icons confess i found the discussion about going after osama bin laden riveting. this was described over and over again as the democratic national convention is a bold and decisive move by this president, but she had to describe it or it
be uncomfortable. in reality, the obama administration has said it will consider proposals from states that are aimed at finding better ways of getting welfare recent beans into jobs. factcheck.org and the "washington post" fact checker have said the same, that the claim is false. [cheers and applause] >> what do you say? >> ladies and gentlemen, -- >> allow me to respond. >> the truth tour begins tonight. >> i should've set that up at the beginning of that was herman cain maintaining the same point that romney campaign has, that the obama administration is getting rid of the work requirement. and what i thought that showed was the importance of fact checkers in this campaign. and i really think, and brendan and glenn and i were just talking about how things are different this time compared to 2008. there's more fact checking than ever, and the fact-checking hasn't taken much greater prominence this time. the candidates are being asked about it. i got a call from cnn last night that they had asked mitt romney in an interview about how the fact checkers have debunked that ad. and about
-span.org. >> next, three former obama administration pentagon officials defend the president's foreign policy and national security record while criticizing mitt romney. moderated by former cnn, cnn contributor bill schneider, the discussion focuses largely on iran's nuclear program and america's presence in afghanistan. this event, which took place yesterday, runs about an hour, and we'll show you as of this as we can until the pentagon briefing scheduled at 2 p.m. eastern. >> struggling in, and you're encouraged to help yourself to coffee, food, whatever you need. my name's mike bennett, on behalf of my colleagues, jim kessler -- who's here somewhere -- sean gibbons and mika, welcome to another anti-politics press breakfast. before i hand it over to bill, i just had a couple of things we wanted to talk about relating to our work on national security. as mitt romney discovered on september 11th of this year, nothing has the power to shake up a presidential race like a change in national security. and that can be either an external event as we had in libya and egypt, or it can be a political
government grew during the bush and administration and during the obama administration 1.7%. i agree it is too big bet you put it in the wrong era. we both know of entrepreneurs who have been very successful but but who built the road who built the highways and it is basic six common-sense people understand people come into the state with no government at all. then don't drive on the highway. businesses need the educated work force granted, it is public-private partnership
years of the obama administration from only 1.5%. i agree that the federal government is too vague, big, but i think you are laying that in the wrong era. what i believe is that small businesses do go from entrepreneurial spirit. there is no question. we have been very successful. but even as we started telling that story, who built the roads and bridges and highways. practical people, commonsense new common sense new hampshire voters understand that we have had these states come in and they don't want any government at all. don't drive on the highways. it is the reality -- the reality is an educated workforce that is primarily from the public schools, the public university, from the technical colleges, public and private partnership. that is what i spent my career doing. bringing people together. the nonprofit communities and to give sense that it's necessary to have legislation, often it is not. the two projects that i like to work on are the medication bridge program in the college savings program. neither of those required any government expenditures. not a single tax dollar. and it
there are a lot of folks that believe gosh, we need more rigorous immigration enforcement. that's why the obama administration embraced the. it's about how all these things represent and what are you obligate to say when you're pinned down. do you believe in enforcing these laws, or not? the thing is when you say, the whole idea of the dream act is that well, these are the good kids. let's attack the interest of the good kids. advocates will say, i think there are, it doesn't mean you're a bad kid if you're in community college or it may be got in trouble if you're a teenager and your criminal record, it doesn't make you a bad person and i think there's something very disingenuous about the debate. that's of course advocates want to structure the debate in a certain way. i don't know how much of this is rooted in any kind of beliefs prior to the way that we actually structure the conversation. i do think that advocates have structured the conversation very advantageously which is their job. >> thank you. >> just a couple more questions and then we'll have to cut it off. so maybe back there. and
$200,000. so then i called him later and said what is going on here? apparently the obama administration called clinton's people and basically sevilla, you're not on the narrative. you need to go out and take that statement that. it was a pretty big brouhaha over the situation, but i think it's pretty clear what country were bill clinton stands. he thinks everything should be extended even though right now during political football and 40 days out of the election i don't think a repeat debra now. >> host: maria bartiromo, when you have that interview and follow-up to that interview, is it tough to get a second interview with him? >> guest: absolutely. i think right now the president is not going to even go down the road and talk about the taxation because he doesn't want to make any mistakes. one thing about bill clinton is he says that he feels for the most part. and so, he won't come out and say something to your face that he really doesn't believe. so he's avoiding that conversation right now. >> host: stillwater, oklahoma, please go ahead with your question. >> caller:
obama has accused china of exports. as the administration done enough to protect business against unfair trade practices from china? >> they can do more. i am glad they jumped in on the issue about the tires and the issue about the cards. i am concerned about new hampshire losing 16,000 jobs and i think congressman bass is on record with the special trade status for china that is very threatening. dirksen senate office build >> the trade vote is one that is over a decade ago and it is important because it assures the great success china plays by our rules and not the other way around but i do agree such issues as currency debate ought to be resolved and i condemn this administration of doing virtually nothing proactive to deal with the issue of china competition. >> the postal service is losing $50 million a day and proposed cutting saturday service. bass: i break with my republican colleagues. a miscalculation by the office of personnel management on their retirement contribution but once you take that issue and put it aside which they should do we still have a postal service running at
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9